Quote Originally Posted by TaichiLiberal View Post
No stupid, it's just I tire of doing homework for willfully ignorant right wing clods like yourself. But since you force the issue, here's just one example that you can whine "fake news" about:
https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/ And also: Antifa protestors threaten to 'burn' down Washington DC Read more At:
https://www.aninews.in/news/world/us...0210207150821/ Next time, try reading other news sources and use some critical thinking before your fingers hit the keys...makes you look less stupid when you pick up the gauntlet for other right wing flunkies.
Your Time.com source is dated SEPTEMBER 5, 2020, and cites a
debunked "report" by ACLED (which relied on data collection from the U.S. Crisis Monitor) which purports to represent their "analysis" of events between May 26 and August 22.
The other is a report that appears to confirm the OP. I wonder if you were aware of that.
Since we're discussing an event that took place on February 6, 2021, your anachronous attempt at deflection is risible.
Now, I'll address your "93% peaceful" trope:
Let’s start with the framing effects and then we’ll get to the outright under-counting of violence. The self-styled “US Crisis Monitor” counted about 7,750 BLM protests from 26 May to 22 August, of which about 550 were violent. That’s six violent protests a day. The US Crisis Monitor reports “only” 220 locations where protests were violent but does not admit that this works out at a rate of more than 9 percent of the locations in which BLM protests occurred. The report describes 93 percent of protests as “overwhelmingly peaceful,” and describes the other 7 percent as “miniscule.” Further, the US Crisis Monitor characterizes most of the violence as instigated by "opponents of BLM masquerading as supporters". However, the report’s few citations focus on a single report of supposed Hell’s Angel and white supremacist wielding an umbrella against windows. The report then describes the violence as “largely confined to specific blocks, rather than dispersed throughout the city.” What is the threshold for “throughout the city”? The US Crisis Monitor doesn’t explain. It’s a sleight of hand (technically, a fallacy known as incrementalism). The US Crisis Monitor claims to be non-profit, non-partisan, “independent,” and “objective.” Most of the parent organization’s funders are foreign. The main domestic private funder is the Tableau Foundation, based in Seattle. Its claim to be “data-driven” is undermined by its presumption of “systemic racism” without definition or evidence. Its website claims “the need to dismantle the forms of racism that are so deeply entrenched in our systems and institutions.” It supplies “data to address longstanding inequities.” In June 2020 it committed $10 million “to dismantle systemic racism in the US.” In June, the US Crisis Monitor’s organizers issued a statement expressing “solidarity” with any protests “calling for systemic and peaceful change.” At best, this statement is naive.
.
https://thecritic.co.uk/the-myth-behind-blms-peaceful-protests/
Further facts that you evidently failed to consider are included here:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/a-misleading-attempt-to-bolster-the-mostly-peaceful-riots-narrative https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/us-politics/study-says-black-lives-matter-protests-93-per-cent-peaceful/news-story/b0edaa9dd5fe765318d328d29fa1b114
Intellectual dishonesty is your hallmark, and failure is your reward.
